Skip to main content
3:00 pm
3:01 pm
>>chris: we will talk with ambassador rice and the chairman rogers in a moment, but, first, here is the latest on the situation overseas. protests have attacked the u.s. targets in 20 nations citing concerns over protests and ordered all personnel to leave in libya there are reports of more arrests in the attack that killed four americans including arch stevens. for more on the continuing unrest we bring in leland vittert in cairo, egyptian. >> there is a tense calm here in cairo. you can feel it.
3:02 pm
you can also smell it because of the amount of tear gas that is still on the ground. it is almost like the fuse burned out just before it got to the dynamite. there are hundreds if not thousands of riot police protesting the embassy that was rocked by four days of violence. the police and military used rubber bullets to beat back protesters with rocks and molotov cocktails and the protests numbering in the thousands, carrying posters of osama bin laden and chanted "obama, obama, we are all osama bin laden." in afghanistan, a police officer turned his guns on four u.s. troops killing all four, the third insider attack in as many days. in sudan the government denied a u.s. marine special operations detachment dispatched to the country to try and secure the embassy there on friday with massive violence after a local
3:03 pm
sheik called for a protest on the radio, a number of people took to the buses and the protesters numbered in the thousands and were beaten back by riot police who, in the end, shot protesters. the arabian peninsula called for more attacks and in cairo the reports are there is a credible threat against the u.s. embassy with large barricades, now, all over cairo, protecting the interests of the embassy with graffiti saying "go to hell, usa." >>chris: thanks, leland. joining us now are ambassador to the united nations susan rice. ambassador, welcome back. this week there have been anti-american protests in two dozen countries across the islamic world. the white house says it has nothing to do with the president's policies. let's watch. >> this is not a case of
3:04 pm
protests directed at the united states at large or at united states policy but in response to a video that is offensive. >>chris: you do not believe that? >>guest: absolutely. in fact, it is the case. we have had the evolution of the arab spring the last many months. what sparked the violence was the airing on the internet of a hateful and offensive video that has offended many people around the world. our strong view is there is no excuse for violence, it is absolutely reprehensible and never justifyied. but there are those who have reacted with violence and the governments have increasingly responded and protected our facilities and condemned the violence. this outrageous response to what is an offensive video. in question that in the past
3:05 pm
with "satanic verses," and cartoon of the prophet mohammed, there have been protesters that have sparked. >>chris: critics say this outpouring of outrage against the united states has everything to do with the u.s. policies. that we are disengaging from that part of the world, we pulled out of iraq, we pulled out of afghanistan, and iran is continuing on with the nuclear program and our critics say our allies do not trust us. >>guest: that is false. partners and allies have responded effectively and promptly when we asked them to protect our facilities. >>chris: well, it took three days in cairo. >>guest: what happened in cairo was not sufficiently oh
3:06 pm
bust when president obama picked up the phone and together to president morsi, and right away things changed. what happened is the authorities in egypt have been robust in protecting our facility, not just in cairo but elsewhere in the country. president morsi has calmed for calm. we saw the same thing in yemen, in libya, tunisia. >>chris: so why ask all nongovernmental personnel to leave tunisia and sudan? >>guest: but are not asking all nongovernmental personnel. >>guest: we assess the security conditions necessity this, we have asked temporarily family members and nonessential personnel depart. we do that all over the world when security circumstances warrant. it is short-term. it is temporary.
3:07 pm
it is brew -- prudent. the number one priority is protection of american personnel. >>chris: are we turning the corner? >>guest: we have seen outrage in the past and, unfortunately, violent outrage which is never justified. it could occur in other circumstances, as well, there is no predicting this. the last couple of days have been better. we are vigilant and of the view what this is not an expression of hostility in the broadest sense toward the united states or u.s. policy. it is approximately a reaction to the video and it is a hateful video that had nothing to do with the united states and which we find disgusting. >>chris: you talk about our influence and impact. our closest ally in the region, israel, clearly doesn't feel we are supporting them when it comes to confronting iran and,
3:08 pm
in fact, this past week, the prime minister binyamin netanyahu, blasted the united states, for the failure to set the same red lines as he has in terms of stopping the nuclear program of iran. >> the world tells israel "wait, there still time." i say, wait for what? wait until when? those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before iran, do not have a moral right to place a red light before israel. >>chris: when netanyahu requested a meeting the 39 said he was too busy to meet with him. let me ask my question. there will be a question, is that how we treat our best friend in the region? >>guest: let me answer that in three parts. the overall relationship with israel.
3:09 pm
as prime minister binyamin netanyahu and against minister have said, the intelligence and security relationship between the united states and israel at present is unprecedented, never stronger. those are their words. that is the overall nature of our relationship: very strong, stronger than ever. second, with respect to iran, the united states, president obama, has been absolutely crystal clear, the united states will not allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. we will do what it takes to prevent that from happening. all options are on the table including the military option. this is not a policy of containment but a policy to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. that is the bottom line. if the prime minister prefers calling it a red line, that is the bottom line. we have said, and i think we are in constant communication with israeli security and
3:10 pm
intelligence and policy officials, we think there is time through economic pressure which is unprecedented, as well, iran's economy is now shrinking by 1 percent a year, the oil production is down, the currency has plummeted 40 percent in the last several months, with sanctions going into full effect. we think there is time and space for the pressure to yield the result. the bottom line, the only way to permanently end iran's nuclear program is if it decides to give that program up. the most solemn decision a president can ever take is a decision to go to war. president obama's view is we will do what it takes but before we resort to the use of force let us be sure we have exhausted other means, including sanctions, pressure, and diplomacy, to ensure that iran fully and finally gives up its nuclear weapon. >>chris: in the time we have left --. >>guest: you asked about the
3:11 pm
visit. >>chris: we have limited time. >>guest: you left me hanging. i wanted to address that. the president is coming up to the general assembly in new york at the united nations. he will be there in the beginning of the week, monday and tuesday. prime minister binyamin netanyahu is coming to the end of the week. the schedules do not match. this is no opportunity to match. >>chris: there is suggestions from the israelis to go to washington, dc -- clearly, clearly the point is, countries that do not set red lines do not have the moral authority to put red lights on israel. that does not sound "happy." >>guest: we are close friends. >>chris: why did the president call binyamin netanyahu in the middle of the night and talk for an hour? >>guest: they are friends. they pick up the phone and talk when they need to talk. they talked for an hour.
3:12 pm
it was a good conversation. natr relationship that the two partners speak to one another regularly. we have no daylight between us on the issue of preventing iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. that is our clear bottom line and the president could not be any plainer about it. >>chris: now the attack on the consulate that killed the ambassador. a top libyan official says the attack on that consulate on tuesday was "preplanned." al qaeda says the operation was revenge for our killing a top al qaeda leader. >>guest: first of all, obviously, we are investigating this, closely. the f.b.i. has the lead in the investigation. the information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that, in fact, this was not a preplanned premeditated attack. what happened initially was it was a spontaneous reaction to
3:13 pm
what had just transpired in cairo as a consequence of the video. people were gathered outside the embassy and it grew violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons which unfortunately, are quite common in post revolutionary libya. that, then, spun out-of-control attack. we will wait for the results of the investigation. we do not want to jump to conclusions before that. it is important for the american people to know our best current assessment. >>chris: the last question, terror cells in benghazi carried out five attacks since april including one at the same consulate, a bombing at this same consulate, in june. should u.s. security have been tighter at that consulate given the history of terror activity in benghazi? >>guest: obviously we did have a strong security presence and, unfortunately, two of the four
3:14 pm
americans who died in benghazi were there to provide security. obviously it wasn't sufficient in the circumstances to prevent the overrun of the consulate. this is among the things that, obviously, will be looked at, as the investigation unfolds --. >>chris: could it have been stronger? >>guest: is why we have upped our presence in tripoli and other parts of the world. chris, we have to see what the assessment reveals. obviously, there was a significant security preparation defending our consulate and our other facility in benghazi and that did not prove sufficient to the moment. >>chris: ambassador rice, thank you very much for coming in today and discussing the fast-moving developments in that part of the world. >> next, the head of the house intelligence committee with the latest on who was behind the debtly attack on our diplomats.
3:15 pm
one, two, three, four ♪ ♪ you say ♪ flip it over and replay ♪ we'll make everything okay ♪ walk together the right way ♪ do, do, do, do the calcium they take because they don't take it with food. switch to citracal maximum plus d. it's the only calcium supplement that can be taken with or without food. that's why my doctor recommends citracal maximum. it's all about absorption. nothing complicated about a pair of 10 inch hose clamp pliers. you know what's complicated? shipping. shipping's complicated. not really. with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service shipping's easy. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. that's not complicated. no. come on. how about... a handshake. alright. priority mail flat rate boxes. starting at just $5.15. only from the postal service.
3:16 pm
♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i cano anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la lla la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything solutionism. the new optimis
3:17 pm
3:18 pm
>> chris: there are still more questions than answers about the >>chris: there are still more questions than answers about the bombings that killed the ambassador and three other americans. we are joined by the chairman of the intelligentsia. congressman, you heard ambassador rice say her latest indications are that the attack on the consulate in benghazi was a spontaneous demonstration about the video that spun out of control. do you agree with the ambassador? >>guest: it is just too early to make that conclusion. there are analysts in department of defense and the c.i.a. and
3:19 pm
operatives both places. as an f.b.i. agent i look at all of that and i come to a different conclusion. they are only moderately confident it was spontaneous. the way the attack took place i have serious questions. it seemed to be a military-style coordinated with indirect fire coordinated with direct fire and rocket attacks. they launched two separate attacks on locations there near the consulate. also, they repelled a fairly significant libyan force that came to rescue the embassy. it want on 9/11. plus other classified information we have that makes you stop for a minute and pause. the first thing you learn as an f.b.i. agent there are coincidences but they are not likely and there are a lot of coincidences. do i believe people showed up that had weapons and joined the effort? probably, i do. but, to me, when you look at all
3:20 pm
of the information across both departments, i am suspect that they could come to that conclusion that it was "spontaneous effort," given the coordination. >>chris: there has been talk about an extremist group in benghazi that they were in touch with another group, al qaeda in north africa. what can you tell us about that? >>guest: for months, al qaeda across northern africa, which joined in 2007, i think, maybe in 2008, they joined al qaeda. they have their own groups in northern africa. they have been looking because al qaeda core, they have said you have to attack western targets. in was an i.e.d. at this facility months ago. we know there is interest by al qaeda, strong interest, to attack western targets. we know that al qaeda cells in
3:21 pm
tunisia have been developing in libya, but we cannot say it al qaedaback but it has the hallmarks of an al qaeda-style event. >>chris: given there have been i.e.d. attack, there have been five terror attacks on the ground against western interests in benghazi and i understand hindsight is 20/20 but were we as prepared as we should given the history of violence in the region, and it was the 1th anniversary of 9/11, and the ambassador was at the not very fortified installation in benghazi, should there have been more security there? >>guest: that is going to be hard to assess. we need to walk to that conclusion. what we and diplomats to do, and remember, they are volunteers, it is an expeditionary exercise.
3:22 pm
it was important to have united states influence for a better outcome that leads to more peaceful events in the future. he gave his life. so we have to look, was the security accurate for what we knew and in accordance with what the mission was for the ambassador at that time. i don't think anyone can say today, yes, or no. the f.b.i. is on the ground and they will have a great forensic picture and we can make a determination. we are also scrubbing everything we knew up to that point. was there a smoking gun that was missed? we do not know that answer, either. i have not seen anything that indicates that. we just don't know. all of those petes have to be put together before we come to the conclusion, they did not is the right security posture in benghazi. >>chris: now, the wave of anti-american violence across the islamic world.
3:23 pm
you just heard ambassador rice say this has nothing to do with u.s. policy in the middle east, but all about the video that insults the prophet mohammed. do you believe that, congressman? >>guest: i don't. i think this is a convenient effort by all to have ulterior motives. the ambassador mentioned the prophet mohammed cartoons, months went by before violence was incited and they did it through their own information operations. so, we know that al qaeda is clearly trying to use this to insight violence. this is a mechanism to do what they have been trying to do all along. what we are finding, too, in some of the demonstrators now in egypt is finding that a lot of the folks have not even seen the video and this is some of the youth group that started the change in egypt and now the day the election happened, they felt
3:24 pm
disenfranchised. so you have economic problems, religious problems, cultural differences, and tribal differences in libya. those are all simmering. we have had at least what appears to the folks in the middle east and they can say what they want but i travel there frequently, the middle east believes, the countries of the middle east, believe there is a disengagement policy by the united states. that lack of leadership there, or at least the clarity on what our position is, that is causing problems. if we rally around the video, we will make a serious mistake and we will make, i think, diplomatic mistakes moving forward if we think that is the only reason people are showing up at our embassy trying to conduct acts of violence. >>chris: you are a congressman, so let me ask you a political question, not an intelligence question. do you think the intelligence is putting it on the video because that allows them to duck questions of their policy? >>guest: well, we have not had
3:25 pm
a robust debate in the presidential campaign about form policy. it has been on the back burner. the president does not talk about it or given speeches, really, of significance since the cairo speech in 2009. i do think that policies overseas have consequences. i had a meeting with a senior middle east intelligence official and i asked? i could make you king for a day what would you ask of the united states, he stopped for a minute and he said, i would like to know, i would tell you to tell us what is your middle east policy? there is no u.s. leadership. that is a powerful thing to hear. this was several months ago. and the policies do have some consequences. it is a combination of all the things i talked about, a very, very difficult problem to solve but you cannot solve it by just trying to step back and letting
3:26 pm
the situation simmer. we have to be part of it. it does not mean investing billions and billions but a combination of showing strength and showing up. we have to be there. >> obviously, relationships will be much more complicated after the arab spring, democracies replace dictatorships, and protesters are allowed to continue, and given the changing situation, could the administration, the president, have done more to aggressively advance our interests in this changing middle east? i will not say it is not hard, these are hard problems. but it is important, with u.s. leadership you do not allow the governments to fan the flames of antiamericannism for their own domestic consumption and do the wink, wink, nudge, nudge, exchanging public statements that we do not like it.
3:27 pm
that is not a good policy and will not solve the problem. you need very direct conversation, you need public conversations, and, i think, from the president, as well, and i hope he engages in a public way in foreign policy, that helps set the record straight about the united states position. again, saying we have great relationships, saying everything is wonderful, saying it is one video causing the problem, obviously the bad guys will use this as a reason for what they are doing, but maybe there is a silver lining and we can turn it around. it should not be about the election. it has to be about standing up for our national security issues because it will impact us no matter who wins in november and it has very serious consequences if we do not get it right. >>chris: should the united states, and this is a decision you have to make as a member of congress, should the u.s. either cut off aid to countries like egypt and libya or at least
3:28 pm
delay it, condition it, on the idea that you have to show you are willing to protect u.s. interests, whether it is literally protecting our embassies and diplomats or protecting or advancing u.s. policies? >> well, the first thing is, they are obligated to protect our embassy, i would not make that a condition of anything. they need to do that today without excuse, and without delay. on top of that, we can condition aid. i always say if we just completely pull out of egypt is america better off or are we worse off for influencing a better outcome phoebe's? it is probably better we have some area of influence in egypt where we can have conversations about you do not want to provoke israel or continue on with this antiamericannism but it has to be conditioned. we should not just give the money and hope for the best. that will not work f we
3:29 pm
understand it is okay to ask for something that is in our best interests, we should not apologize for that, we should not say it is offensive. it is our money, taxpayer money and we should say here is what we want to have happen, and that good glue of the united states, really, we prefer commerce over conflict and if we promote that around the world, the world will be a better place. we have to be there for that to happen. i would not runaway from the money and say we will punish you but we will condition it. if you do not do what we ask, we will take the money away. it is in our best interests. >>chris: congressman rogers thank you for bringing us up to date on the investigation and the situation in the middle east. thank you, congressman. >> now what happens to the middle east policy of the president? that is ahead. to the conversatie come right back. ♪
3:30 pm
why not take a day to explore your own backyard? with two times the points on travel, you may find yourself asking why not, a lot. chase sapphire preferred. there's more to enjoy.
3:31 pm
♪ [ sighs ] [ bird chirps ] [ bird squawks ] ♪ [ bird screeching ] ♪ [ elevator bell dings ] [ sighs ] how mad is she? she kicked me out. but took the best stuff. i'll get the wrench. ♪ [ male announcer ] kohler's tresham collection. life. with a twist. ♪
3:32 pm
3:33 pm
i have come here to cairo to seek a new beginning between >> we need to seek a new going between cairo and the united states and muslims, based on mutual interest and mutual respect, one based on the truth that america and islam or not exclusive and not need be in competition. >>chris: that was president obama in cairo three years ago trying to reset relations between the united states ands islamic world. time now for our senior group. well, we all remember the cairo speech with the president saying that the trauma of 9/11 had led us "to act contrary to our ideals in promising to change
3:34 pm
course." bright, in the aftermath of what we have seen this week, how is the president's policy as set forth in cairo, looking? >> well, a little ragged. i would say that they were marks he made even before the cairo speech that are more to the point when he said in an interest of on november 21, 2007, i truly believes he said, that the day i'm inaugurated the question looks at itself differently but the world looks at itself differently and announced in a discussion of the muslim world and his background in muslim countries and the fact that his half sister is muslim saying this will make us safer, something that the bush administration failed to grasp. what i would say about that, we are seeing in the events this week, the further education of a president who was and to some extent remains a foreign policy novice and learning that his obamaness and all that goes with it is not sufficient to end, or
3:35 pm
to change the fact that the middle east remain as tinderbox subject to being set ablaze by a small match which that movie is, at best, a small match. >>chris: liz, what happened to the "reset," between our relations? >>guest: hard going. as obama said anti-americanism and tensions between the middle east and the united states has been going on for decades and would not instantly exchange. i agree with bright, this is an area where obama, now, is probably suffering the consequences of what were probably inflated expectations that going there and listening would somehow change things. obviously, it is a difficult problem and it seems like we have internal power struggles
3:36 pm
going on and not a lot of options. >>chris: we talked to ambassador rice, i was thinking of you, this notion that the united states is in disengagement from the middle east, we are in retreat, our friends and our enemies do not know who we are or how much they can count on what they believe about us. obviously, the people who killed the americans, the people who stormed the embassy, they are responsible, but to what degree do you think obama's policies have contributed to the events this week? >>guest: they have contributed. i wish it were not the case. i wish president obama has been educated since the cairo speech. and i thought after the surge in afghanistan and after the killing of osama bin laden, the drone attacks, tougher stance, perhaps he had learned something from his early pre-election promises and his speech in the summer of 2009 but i would say
3:37 pm
watching him this week, they are where they were in the cairo speech. the white house press secretary saying that this movie is the --. >>chris: that is what the u.n. ambassador was saying? >> really in that is the position of the u.s. government? not just the obama campaign, but the u.s. government? what is the official response? to send an f.b.i. team to look at situation and now it turns out that the f.b.i. team cannot go to libya, they pulled them back yesterday because it is not safe enough situation to do the franceic investigation. it is like a parody going back to the 1990's. i thought there was bipartisan agreement that way addressing national security threats was not effective. it did not work in the 1990's and now they are back where they were before 9/11. >>chris: i must say i find it
3:38 pm
astonishing the idea they would say this is all about the video. do you think they believe that? or do you think they see that as an easy out and as i suggested now they do not have to answer questions on policy. >>guest: i am not sure if they believe it or not but they are doubling down but they are leaving -- it looks like they believe it. privately, even, in conversations i have had over the weekend with senior administration officials, no one is leaving on the policy that, wait, this is just a line we are giving. but it seems they are opening up themselves to, or leaving themselves vulnerable here when, once more, answers are known, as chairman rogers said, he was giving a very even handed response saying we still don't know the answer to a lot of the questions of what happened over there, so, if this administration, if it turns out a month from now there was a major intelligence failure, this
3:39 pm
is going to look pretty irresponsible and silly right new to say this is all because of the trailer for a video. i was at the speech in cairo in june of 2009 and i am struck by how much has changed and how much it looks almost, some of the comments sound, i don't know if naive is the word, but...quaint, given everything that has happened with the arab spring. it is not, really, irrelevant. there is time for a reset of that reset. we have not heard the president talk about his policy since then. >>chris: that brings up a fair question, the air spring. obviously it will be more complicated after the arab spring. you could not just call up mubarak and say, stop the protesters. you have democracies rather than dictators and islamic groups free to protest and express themselves. how could the president have better managed what was always going to be a messy transition? >> couple of things.
3:40 pm
one, look at how the president and the team dealt with the actions in the countries that were most affected by the arab spring. we have a mixed set of results. the other question revolves around when militant islamists are considering how to attack or undermine the united states, it is believed that one of the things they deeply respect is power and force. they understand it. they recognize it. they fear it. it worries them. if you look at the fact that we are out of iraq, we are pulling out of afghanistan, does that look to them like strength or weakness and a possible opportunity? if it turns out that al qaeda was deeply involved in the benghazi attack, it will be a very significant al qaeda success and the first they have had in, really, since the heyday of al qaeda in iraq. that will represent, it seems to me, a serious sign of failure of
3:41 pm
the administration's policy throughout the region. >>chris: we have to take a break here. of national security as it is playing out on the campaign trail. ♪ ♪ ♪
3:42 pm
♪ that should do it. enjoy your new shower. [ door opens, closes ]
3:43 pm
3:44 pm
the first responsethe >> the first response of the united states must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation and an apology for america's values is never the right course. >> governor romney has a tendency to shoot first and aim later. as president, one of the things i have learned, you cannot do that. >>chris: rebound and governor romney punching and counter
3:45 pm
punching over violence in the middle east. we are back with the panel. it has been the big political question in washington: did mitt romney make a mistake attacking the president's policies five hours after we found out the four americans had been slaughtered in benghazi? bright, -- brit, what do you think? >> it was correct but it was clumsy. it opened him up to charges that, you know, he made a terrible mistake. we had almost ludicrous overreaction by the media which what he did became the big story rather than what was happening over there which was not a great moment for our national media. he could have waited. might have been better. but, look, what he was criticizing there was a statement that what we were talking about in the first panel, the administration's emphasis on the video and attacking it and reiterating that. the cairo embassy said that and
3:46 pm
reiterated it, later, after the events unfolded. so, they have doubled down on it. eventually the white house walked it back and so on, but the next thing you know the white house is saying the same thing, it is all about the video so my sense is, he was on the mark the he might have timed or said it better. >>chris: liz in. >> it was a tricky week for both mitt romney and president obama. you have a week when obama is being compared to jimmy carter and romney is compared to nixon that is not a week that either campaign will want to remember. but in the short term romney's statements got more attention. i think the problem romney has in this situation is two fold: one, he did seem political. it seemed likely was act more in the interest of the campaign than the interest of the americans overseas who were in danger. second, it has been hard for him to articulate what he would be doing that is different the he
3:47 pm
says he would be shaping events rather than letting events shape his policy but he does not say what that means. is he saying he would not withdraw from iraq? he would rather we still be there? the consequences of what he is imlying are not policies that would be popular with americans right now. so, it makes it hard, he has the sweeping language how he wanted to project strength but he will not say what that means. strength can be military force or spending more on foreign aid, it is not clear what the actions would be. >>chris: even if romney's timing was wrong, there is a legitimate debate to have over the president's foreign policy and we had some of i today with ambassador rice and congressman rogers. yet i talked to top officials in the romney campaign who have no plans for major foreign policy speech in the next few weeks before the debates. the question is, why not?
3:48 pm
i keep home alive they will think they should address the issue that is on the mind of we every american now. what is going on over there? why is it happening? what would the next president do to address it? it is crazy not to address it. that is what people want to hear about. i heard from a congressional candidate yesterday saying in an e-mail he is interested in foreign policy but he has not talked much and the audiences have not asked about it but suddenly last week he begin to raise it on wednesday or thursday but all the questions were about it. the next president is going to have to deal with this: what are you going to do? he needs to do it. he was clumsy but better to be clumsy and correct than timid and silent. as someone who hopes romney wins, i hope he is not timid and silent and he does what liz says, laying out the foreign policy agenda. they are spooked, i talked with the romney people, you have to
3:49 pm
be careful, all wars. which convention spoke war about war? who was not afraid to say the word afghanistan? it was the democrats. and they got a bounce. so maybe the american public is more mature and maybe they would like to hear what the next president would do about the crisis. >>chris: it would be fair to say, jeff, this is a sense among the political observers as we see the polls that romney is losing, not that he has lost or that it is over but he is losing ground. the question is, after the election, paul ryan, which is seen as a bold price, they seem to have gone back into something of a crouch and are not campaigning on a bold agenda as a candidate of reform. what are they thinking in romney headquarters? >> they frustrated by the growing story line that he could be losing, but "losing" is the
3:50 pm
wrong way do look at it. he probably has failed to take advantage of this moment of the three week since naming the vice presidential candidate and into the convention. they have had a hard time of resetsing the race and gaining ground. it is absurd to say he has lost the likely voters with a three-point contest. so, that is with, even what romney's advisors will concede they did not have the smoothest of weeks this is still an even race, and anything could happen. but across the country, things are doing better. >>chris: but why the reluctance to give a major foreign policy speech?
3:51 pm
why the reluctance with all the criticism that his policies favor the rich over the middle class? why not give a speech to explain. people are clamoring what he would do with class reform that hurt the rich. >> the overarching authority is this election is about rebound and they can win by the growing sentiment that it is time to fire president obama. i'm not sure that is right. they have to give, it seem as lot of republican hunger for more of a reason to hire governor romney. i am not concerned they will not give a big speech. they have the same information that everyone here talks about, they have to kick stuff. >> even if this is, in effect, a referendum on the president, the challenger has something to do: present himself as a plausible
3:52 pm
and acceptable presidential alternative. romney has the presidential bearing doing, he is fine on that. he presented himself at the convention as a nice guy and a normal person with a great family. he has that down. but he didn't dwell on the economic policies he would put in place and a big piece of being a plausible president is being knowledgeable and have a deem sense of the world and the united states place in it and to differentiate we the policy you pursue from the other guy and he has not done that. he may get the referendum, but if he has not done his part and extend up as a plausible alternative he could lose anyway. >> yes, i think it has become a difficult story line for romney that he is losing. we have had a lot of stories in the last week about the differences in the polls. the entire media 11s is through the lens of him being a losing
3:53 pm
candidate. the reaction this week to his statement, it seems to be an act of desperation. that is how you cover a loading candidate. that is something the romney campaign will have to do something to turn around. right now, it is not helping them. >>chris: bill, less than a minute left, what confuses me, he picked ryan as the running mate, i thought that is a statement he will come forward with a bolds affirmative, positive agenda, and he will be the candidate of reform, but he has, after naming him, and getting a little bump in the poll and pet getting excited he has not capitalized on that. >> from the day he named until the republican national convention, romney gained, narrowing a 4 1/2 gap to one point of clear politics average and back up to three points and he needs to follow up on the consequences of choosing ryan which is positive. >>chris: we pick up with this discussion on our website and we will post a video before noon
3:54 pm
eat -- eastern time. ♪ one, two, three, four ♪ ♪ you say dealer try this... bayer? this isn't just a headache. trust me, this is new bayer migraine. [ male announcer ] it's the power of aspirin plus more in a triple action formula to relieve your tough migraines. new bayer migraine formula. ♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i cano anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la lla la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions
3:55 pm
help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything solutionism. the new optimis nothing complicated about a pair of 10 inch hose clamp pliers. you know what's complicated? shipping. shipping's complicated. not really. with priority mail flat rate boxes from the postal service shipping's easy. if it fits, it ships anywhere in the country for a low flat rate. that's not complicated.
3:56 pm
no. come on. how about... a handshake. alright. priority mail flat rate boxes. starting at just $5.15. only from the postal service. >> chris: they are one of washington's power couples. he the was the top executive at aol and cbs. she used to write sitcoms. now taking on the fight of their lives and they are our power players of the week. >> the only disease top ten
3:57 pm
killers that has no means of prevention, cure or treatment. >> george is talking about alzheimer's the disease that robs people of memory and then mind and eventually kills them. he and his wife of 43 years trish have donated millions of dollars to launch an organization called us against alzheimer's. >> chris: what is the goal? >> it means prevention and treatment by the year 2020. >> chris: is there any reason to believe that is possible over the next eight years? >> yes, the answer is 2020 is feasible. is it a guarantee, no otherwise why should we be in the game. >> chris: what makes it different they invest in research but it's also a political action committee contributing to candidates that back their fight. this week the braydenbergs were on capitol hill meeting with jim moran. >> cancer is allocated about $6
3:58 pm
billion a year, hiv-aids, $3 billion and alzheimer's $450 million a year. >> chris: he says if we don't find a treatment for alzheimer's it will bankrupt the nation. now 5 million americans have the disease but with aging babyboomers that will double in 30 years. >> it's costing $200 billion a year, 70% of that comes from medicare and medicaid. that is going out to one trillion a year. >> chris: it's personal. trish's mother who was a new hampshire democrat died of the disease 20 years ago. >> we saw her go downhill from the towering human being to the person who didn't know us. >> chris: tough question. do you worry you are going to get it? >> there are days i can't find my keys. yeah, i worry. >> chris: is it true you haven't been tested?
3:59 pm
>> until i know that there is a possibility of having some way to diminish or stop or rest alzheimer's, i don't need to know if i have a death sentence or not. >> chris: honestly how much of this crusade is the fact that you want to find a cure, a treatment? >> of course. whether i'm the caregiver or the victim. one out of two over 85 have this disease. >> chris: so they keep sounding the alarm. keep trying to build a political movement against a killer they say is coming for them in and so many of us. >> with alzheimer's its cruel disease, it's going to take tens of millions of lives and we can't get ourselves together. that is frustrating. >> chris: if you want to learn more about their cause, check out their website up against alzheimer' have a great week. we'll see you

FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace
FOX News September 16, 2012 3:00pm-4:00pm PDT

News/Business. (2012) U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice; Rep. Mike Rogers; Brit Hume; Liz Marlantes. (CC) (Stereo)

TOPIC FREQUENCY Cairo 19, U.s. 15, United States 14, Romney 12, Benghazi 11, Us 8, Libya 7, Israel 6, Obama 5, Egypt 5, Afghanistan 5, Iraq 4, Alzheimer 4, Binyamin Netanyahu 4, Rogers 4, The F.b.i. 3, Washington 3, Alzheimer 's 3, America 3, Tunisia 3
Network FOX News
Duration 01:00:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Virtual Ch. 760 (FOX NEWS HD)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 1280
Pixel height 720
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 9/16/2012